[erlang-questions] Does Erlang pure functional programming language?

Tony Rogvall <>
Mon Jan 23 19:17:44 CET 2012


On 23 jan 2012, at 18:28, Jon Watte wrote:

> What does "pure" mean anyway?
> The reason we run computer programs is to enjoy their side effects.
> If a program does not change some observable state (display, disk, network, etc) then that program is useless to any user.
> This is why every functional language actually used to build applications has some way of dealing with (and generating) side effects.
> 


Think of your self as part of a grand scale state threading, it just make sense.

/Tony


> Sincerely,
> 
> jw
> 
> 
> --
> Americans might object: there is no way we would sacrifice our living standards for the benefit of people in the rest of the world. Nevertheless, whether we get there willingly or not, we shall soon have lower consumption rates, because our present rates are unsustainable. 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Abdul Fattah Mahran <> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I want to know if Erlang pure functional programming language or not? I can't find a clear document that states this. If someone can tell where I can find this information in Erlang documentation it will help a lot.
> 
> Thanks
> Best Regards,
> Abd El-Fattah Mahran
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> 
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

"Installing applications can lead to corruption over time. Applications gradually write over each other's libraries, partial upgrades occur, user and system errors happen, and minute changes may be unnoticeable and difficult to fix"



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20120123/5d2b04ee/attachment.html>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list